HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33363 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vinod with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.212 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 324(4) B.N.S., Police Station- Gaunda, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. It is further submitted that injured Harshit has sustained only simple injury on the non vital part of his body. In the medical report, a lacerated wound was found on the hand of the injured. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to civil dispute pending between the parties. It is a matter of cross case. Previously also, an FIR was lodged by the applicant against the informant and his family members regarding the same incident, in which, both the parties have sustained injuries. The applicant has criminal history of three cases, which have been duly explained in paragraph 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. He is languishing in jail since 29.07.2025. In case, he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the above arguments and has submitted that the applicant has assigned the main role of causing grievous injury to the injured. Charge-sheet has already been filed in this Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Singh Chahar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vinod .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) case. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed. 6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the BAIL No. 33363 of 2025 2 opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 9, 2025 Radhika BAIL No. 33363 of 2025 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad